Editor's note: Posts published on From the Workplace are written by outside contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of SHRM.
Many organizations prioritize succession planning, yet a closer look reveals a less visible dynamic, one that doesn’t show up in strategy decks but shapes how succession actually works.
In our latest research, IIC Partners surveyed 171 senior leaders across large enterprises and found that nearly two-thirds (63%) reported having someone trained and ready to step up, a positive signal that many organizations are developing internal talent for leadership continuity. But this doesn’t tell the full story. Hidden behind that readiness is a subtle constraint rooted in job security concerns.
The Succession Planning Paradox
Succession planning depends on leaders sharing what makes them valuable: knowledge, relationships, and decision-making context. Yet many believe their success lies in keeping those very same elements to themselves. Our research clearly shows this contradiction.
On the positive side, around seven in ten respondents indicated that sharing their knowledge, skills, and client relationships with a potential successor does not pose a threat to their job security. However, when asked whether keeping unique knowledge or key relationships private is necessary to protect their roles, 61% said yes.
There lies the paradox: Most leaders are willing, in principle, to share knowledge openly. Yet they still perceive too much transparency as a threat and act to preserve their indispensability. This is a significant risk to succession planning and development programs.
AI Amplifies the Fear of Replacement
While organizations continue to invest in succession planning, many leaders remain too cautious to fully enable it. Not through overt resistance, but through a subtle, often unconscious, form of self-protection. The rise of AI is amplifying these concerns by demonstrating that entire tasks can be automated and that knowledge is gathered and shared without constraint.
As a result, leaders share knowledge, but selectively. They introduce relationships, but do not fully transfer them. They prepare successors, but do not fully empower them.
Reframing Succession Planning
As our data demonstrates, the majority of leadership roles at large organizations already have succession plans in place. What remains is more difficult to navigate: bridging the gap between what leaders say and what they’re willing to do.
One way to narrow this gap is to reinforce succession planning as an ongoing process that strengthens organizational resilience, rather than focusing the program messaging on individual transitions.
Leaders need to believe that developing successors strengthens their position, not weakens it. The mindset shift required is this: Sharing what differentiates them creates a path for their own advancement, and having a trained successor reduces the pressure to always be available — a genuine relief when crisis strikes.
In the end, those who are most effective at succession planning aren’t the ones who make themselves indispensable. They’re the ones who make their impact transferable.
Christine Hayward is the Executive Director of IIC Partners, a global executive search and leadership consulting organization with 45 offices worldwide.
Was this resource helpful?
Validate your HR expertise
Earning your SHRM-CP credential makes you a recognized expert and leader in the HR field.
Related Content
Transform HR with mobile technology to streamline workflows, enhance communication, and boost employee engagement across distributed teams.
A new study found that talent development practitioners believe performance-based assessments are more effective at measuring employee learning outcomes than knowledge tests.
As AI makes deeper inroads into organizations, employee concerns about the technology continue to grow. Here's how HR leaders can address the fear of AI among their own staff, as well as in the wider organization.